THE LA RAZA CRIME TIDAL WAVE - “These figures do not attempt to allege that foreign
nationals in the country illegally commit more
crimes than other groups,” the report states. “It
simply identifies thousands of crimes that should
not have occurred and thousands of victims that
should not have been victimized because the
perpetrator should not be here.”
CHARLOTTE CUTHBERTSON

Monday, September 26, 2011

THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN MEXICO IS UNDER 6%...IN PARTS OF LA RAZA OCCUPIED MEXIFORNIA IT IS NEARLY 30%!

OBAMA AND THE LA RAZA DEMS WILL CONTINUE TO HISPANDER FOR THE ILLEGALS' VOTES BY SABOTAGING E-VERIFY, AND PROMISES OF CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT OF ALL LAWS PROHIBITING THE EMPLOYMENT OF ILLEGALS!

September 26, 2011

Slump Alters Jobless Map in U.S., With South Hit Hard

By MICHAEL COOPER

When the unemployment rate rose in most states last month, it underscored the extent to which the deep recession, the anemic recovery and the lingering crisis of joblessness are beginning to reshape the nation’s economic map.

The once-booming South, which entered the recession with the lowest unemployment rate in the nation, is now struggling with some of the highest rates, recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show.

Several Southern states — including South Carolina, whose 11.1 percent unemployment rate is the fourth highest in the nation — have higher unemployment rates than they did a year ago. Unemployment in the South is now higher than it is in the Northeast and the Midwest, which include Rust Belt states that were struggling even before the recession.

For decades, the nation’s economic landscape consisted of a prospering Sun Belt and a struggling Rust Belt. Since the recession hit, though, that is no longer the case. Unemployment remains high across much of the country — the national rate is 9.1 percent — but the regions have recovered at different speeds.

Now, with the concentration of the highest unemployment rates in the South and the West, some economists and researchers wonder if it is an anomaly of the uneven recovery or a harbinger of things to come.

“Because the recovery is so painfully slow, people may begin to think of the trends established during the recovery as normal,” said Howard Wial, a fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program who recently co-wrote an economic analysis of the nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas. “Will people think of Florida, California, Nevada and Arizona as more or less permanently depressed? Think of the Great Lakes as being a renaissance region? I don’t know. It’s possible.”

The West has the highest unemployment in the nation. The collapse of the housing bubble left Nevada with the highest jobless rate, 13.4 percent, followed by California with 12.1 percent. Michigan has the third-highest rate, 11.2 percent, as a result of the longstanding woes of the American auto industry.

Now, though, of the states with the 10 highest unemployment rates, six are in the South. The region, which relied heavily on manufacturing and construction, was hit hard by the downturn.

Economists offer a variety of explanations for the South’s performance. “For a long time we tended to outpace the national average with regard to economic performance, and a lot of that was driven by, for lack of a better word, development and in-migration,” said Michael Chriszt, an assistant vice president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s research department. “That came to an abrupt halt, and it has not picked up.”

The long cycle of “lose jobs, gain jobs, lose jobs” that kept Georgia’s unemployment rate at 10.2 percent in August — the same as it was a year earlier — is illustrated by Union City, a small city on the outskirts of Atlanta.

It suffered a blow when the last store in its darkened mall, Sears, announced that it would soon close. But the city had other irons in the fire: a few big companies were hiring, and earlier this year Dendreon, a biotech company that makes a cancer drug, opened a plant there, lured in part by state and local subsidies.

Then, Dendreon announced this month that it would lay off more than 100 workers at the new plant as part of a national “restructuring.”

Union City, with a population of 20,000, now calls itself the place “Where Business Meets the World” and has been trying to lure companies by pointing out its low business taxes, various incentive programs and proximity to Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.

Steve Rapson, the city manager, said that the challenge there, as in much of America, has been to get employers to hire again. “It’s hard to get your mind around what can you do as a city to encourage future jobs and jobs growth,” he said.

The reordering of the nation’s economic fortunes can be seen in the Brookings analysis, which found that many auto-producing metropolitan areas in the Great Lakes states are seeing modest gains in manufacturing that are helping them recover from their deep slump, while Sun Belt and Western states with sharp drops in home values are still suffering. The areas that have been hurt the least since the recession, the study said, rely on government, education or energy production. Places that were less buoyed by the housing bubble were less harmed when it burst.

In Pennsylvania, the analysis found, the Pittsburgh area — which is heavily reliant on education and health care — is weathering the downturn better than the Philadelphia area. In New York, areas around long-struggling upstate cities like Buffalo and Rochester are recovering faster by some measures than the New York City metropolitan area. And the rate of recovery in Rust Belt areas around Youngstown and Akron, two Ohio cities that were hit hard, has outpaced that of former boomtowns like Colorado Springs and Tucson.

In a sign of how severe the downturn has been, the Brookings analysis found that only 16 of the nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas have regained more than half of the jobs they lost during the recession.

The toll on the nation’s millions of unemployed people has been harsh, with the Census Bureau reporting that the United States had more people living in poverty last year than in any year since it began keeping records half a century ago.

Joblessness is taking a toll on states, too. This month, 27 states will have to pay $1.2 billion to the federal government in interest on the $37.5 billion that they borrowed in recent years to keep paying unemployment benefits.

What is most striking about the high unemployment rates, several economists said in interviews, is how they continue to afflict wide parts of the country.

“It just seems to be so pervasive across the country — except for the breadbasket area — that it’s hard to pick out anybody who is bouncing back,” said Randall W. Eberts, the president of the W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research in Michigan.

Dr. Eberts pointed to another feature of the downturn: people are much less likely to leave their jobs voluntarily.

Before the recession, he said, about three million people voluntarily left their jobs each month. Now, around two million people do — leaving fewer openings for job seekers.

So what happened in South Carolina? Richard Kaglic, a regional economist with the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, Va., said the state’s lingering troubles reflect what happened when its once-thriving construction and manufacturing industries were hit hard by the recession. Mr. Kaglic, who is also a pilot, used an aviation metaphor to explain what he meant.

“If your nose is high, if you’re climbing faster and your engine cuts out, you fall farther and it takes you a longer time to recover,” he said. “The conditions we experienced in late 2008, 2009, are as close as you come to an engine-out situation in the economy.”

But Mr. Kaglic said that the recent return of manufacturing jobs was giving him hope, and that one reason for the high unemployment rate was that more people were now seeking work.

“I would look at it as our dreams are delayed,” he said, “rather than our dreams being denied.”

More in U.S. (2 of 29 articles)Sentencing Shift Gives New Leverage to ProsecutorsRead More »

WATCH THE LA RAZA DEMS FIGHT HARD AGAINST E-VERIFY ON BEHALF OF THEIR LA RAZA PARTY BASE! VIVA LA RAZA LOOTING? THE DEMS DO IT EVERY DAY!

OBAMA DID NOT PUT A LA RAZA SUPREMACIST, HILDA SOLIS IN AS SEC. of (ILLEGAL) LABOR BECAUSE HE WAS GOING TO END THE UNEMPLOYMENT CRISIS BY PUTTING AMERICANS (LEGALS) BACK IN OUR JOBS!LONG FIGHTING THE WAR FOR LA RAZA AGAINST THE AMERICAN WORKER IS OBAMA, FEINSTEIN (WHO HIRES ILLEGALS AT HER S.F. HOTEL), PELOSI (WHO HIRES ILLEGALS AT HER NAPA WINERY), BOXER, WHO WAS REELECTED BY ILLEGALS’ VOTES, REID (WHOSE STATE IS NOW 25% ILLEGAL), AND OBAMA WHO HAS HISPANDERED FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES FROM HIS FIRST DAY IN OFFICE.*NewsmaxObama's 'Hispanicazation' of America Monday, January 10, 2011 08:28 AM*http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/obamas-hispanicazation-of-america-most.html

OBAMA’S AMERICA: Open & Undefended Borders!

“What we're seeing is our Congress and national leadership dismantling our laws by not enforcing them. Lawlessness becomes the norm, just like Third World corruption. Illegal aliens now have more rights and privileges than Americans. If you are an illegal alien, you can drive a car without a driver's license or insurance. You may obtain medical care without paying. You may work without paying taxes. Your children enjoy free education at the expense of taxpaying Americans.” *FAIR Legislative Update September 26, 2011

House Judiciary Committee Passes Mandatory E-Verify In a 22-13 party-line vote, the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday passed legislation by Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) that would require all employers to use the E-Verify employment eligibility verification program. In addition to requiring all employers to use E-Verify, the legislation, entitled the “Legal Workforce Act” (H.R. 2885), makes several important changes including limiting the number of documents employers may accept to verify employment eligibility and increasing the penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens or fail to use E-Verify. Members of the Committee offered a number of amendments to the bill during Wednesday’s markup, but accepted only two prior to passing the bill. The first amendment passed by the Committee, offered by Chairman Smith, was a minor change in order to return a provision of the bill to how it appeared in its previous version, H.R. 2164. Smith’s amendment would require employers to attest that they have verified the employment eligibility of an individual within the three-day verification period—which begins on the date an employer extends an offer of employment—rather than on the date of hire. (H.R. 2885 at §2; see Smith Amdt. #1; see also Roll Call Vote #1) The other amendment passed by the Committee, offered by Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA), struck a provision of the bill in an effort to undermine support for the bill by the agriculture industry. (See Berman Amdt. #1; see also Roll Call Vote #4) The provision— a loophole for agricultural employers—would have modified and codified current regulations by providing that individuals engaged in seasonal agricultural employment returning to work for a previous employer are not considered new hires and thus not subject to verification through E-Verify. (H.R. 2885 at §2; 8 C.F.R. 274A.2(b)(1)(viii)(A)(8)) By striking this provision, the Committee closed a loophole that would have made it easier for illegal agricultural workers to slip through the new E-Verify mandate. Among the rejected amendments was one authored by Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA) to strike the bill’s preemption provision barring state and local governments from enforcing immigration laws against employers (Section 6). (See Lofgren Amdt. #22, see also Roll Call Vote #6) By attempting to delete the preemption provision, Democrats this time tried to undermine the support of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce—support that is deemed key to the bill’s passage on the House floor. Under Section 6, the only conduct of employers that state and local governments may punish through the revocation of a business license is failure to use E-Verify when and as required. This alone voids the portion of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting allowing states to revoke business licenses of employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens. (See FAIR Legislative Update, May 31, 2011) However, even with respect to states that wish to strip business licenses from employers that fail to use E-Verify when and as required, the language is ambiguous about who has the authority to determine whether the employer has actually complied with the program. If challenged, a court could plausibly interpret Section 6 to mean that state and local governments could only revoke the business license of an employer AFTER the federal government makes that determination. Such an interpretation seems even more likely when Section 6 is read in conjunction with Section 5. Section 5 provides that if an employer establishes that it has used E-Verify in good faith, it will be deemed to have met the requirements of the law unless the Department of Homeland Security proves by clear and convincing evidence that the employer knew the employee was an illegal alien. Another amendment to the E-Verify bill that the Judiciary Committee rejected was Rep. Dan Lungren’s (R-CA) amendment to create a new agricultural guest worker program. Rep. Lungren and numerous other Members from agricultural states have made it clear that their support for mandatory E-Verify is contingent on the House also passing a sweeping new agricultural guest worker program. According to Lungren, E-Verify “won’t come to the House floor unless [agricultural workers] are taken care of.” (National Journal, Sept. 21, 2011) Rep. Lungren’s amendment to the E-Verify bill consisted of the same agricultural guest worker bill he introduced earlier this month, H.R. 2895. (See FAIR Legislative Update, Sept. 19, 2011) Lungren intended his bill to be an alternative to the agricultural guest worker program Rep. Smith proposed in H.R. 2847. (See FAIR Legislative Update, Sept. 12, 2011) The House Judiciary Committee was scheduled to mark up Rep. Smith’s agricultural guest worker proposal the same day as the mandatory E-Verify, but postponed consideration of the bill until October.

While the Obama Administration halts deportations to work on its secret amnesty plan, hospitals across the U.S. are getting stuck with the exorbitant tab of medically treating illegal immigrants and some are finally demanding compensation from the federal government. The group that represents most of the nation’s hospitals and medical providers recently urged President Obama to work with Congress to reimburse them for the monstrous cost of treating illegal immigrants. Federal law requires facilities to “treat and stabilize individuals” regardless of their immigration status, but federal support for the services remains “virtually nonexistent,” according to a letter submitted by the American Hospital Association to the president. This week officials in California, the state with the largest concentration of illegal immigrants, joined the call for federal compensation after revealing that hospitals there spend about $1.25 billion annually to care for illegal aliens. The figure skyrocketed from $1.05 billion in 2007, according to California Hospital Association figures quoted in a local news report. The problem will only get worst, according to officials, who say the $1.25 billion for 2010 could actually be higher. They complain that federal law forces them to treat patients in emergency rooms regardless of immigration status yet they get stuck with the financial burden. This has forced many hospitals to curtail services or close beds and could ultimately compromise healthcare.Nationwide, U.S. taxpayers spend tens of billions of dollars annually to provide free medical care for illegal immigrants with states that border Mexico taking the biggest hit. Adding to the problem is the fact that Mexico, the country that provides the largest amount of illegal immigrants in the U.S., has long promoted America’s generous public health centers. It even operates a Spanish-language program (Ventanillas de Salud, Health Windows) in about a dozen U.S. cities that refers its nationals—living in the country illegally—to publicly funded health centers where they can get free medical care without being turned over to immigration authorities.*THESE FIGURES ON WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY ARE DATED. IT NOT EXCEEDS $600 MILLION PER YEAR!!! (source: Los Angeles County & JUDICIAL WATCH)*http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1949085/posts *LOS ANGELES – A MEXICAN WELFARE AND CRIME STATE WHERE THE JOBS ALSO GO TO ILLEGALShttp://mex¬icanoccupa¬tion.blogs¬pot.com/20¬11/04/mexi¬can-welfar¬e-state-in¬-los-angel¬es.html

*One tragic thing about this book is that it was written in 2003. Since then the Mexican occupation has doubled. Welfare to illegals is up to $20 BILLION in California. Welfare to illegals in sanctuary city Los Angeles is past $600 million per year, while Mexican gangs murder all over the state. Yet the lifer-politicians continue to fight for open borders, more perks for illegals, and their illegal votes!*http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/04/mexico-demands-free-health-care-for.html*

Some illegal immigrants have used stolen Social Security numbers to qualify for health programs -- a form of medical identity theft increasingly on hospital radars. Many more scramble to pay for their medicine and doctors visits in cash, a challenge in an economy where day-laborer work has dried up.

SOME ONE HAS TO PAY FOR WALL ST.’s RAPE AND PILLAGE, THE CORRUPTION OF POLITICIANS, AND THE MEXICAN WELFARE STATE IN OUR BORDERS. WALL ST WILL PASS ALONG THEIR LOSES, MEXICO WILL KEEP EXPORTING POVERTY, CRIMINALS AND ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS. AND THE MIDDLE CLASS…. We’re fucked!*http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/09/can-america-afford-equaity-by-hoyt.html*Conservatives argue that subsidizing the rich and large multinational corporations, along with cutting government spending, will create jobs. The question, however, is what jobs and for whom?*THE REALITY FOR JOE LEGAL, v JOSE ILLEGAL:(BUT JOE LEGAL STILL GETS THE TAX BILLS TO PAY FOR JOSE ILLEGAL’S LA RAZA WELFARE STATE IN OUR BORDERS)*http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/joe-american-legal-vs-la-raza-jose.html*

Hoyt HilsmanJournalist, screenwriter, critic, former candidate for CongressCan America Afford Equality? Posted: 9/13/11 09:43 AM ET In his recent book, Pinched, about the Great Recession, author Don Peck points out that the top 1 percent of Americans possess as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent. In terms of income growth, two out of every three dollars in growth goes to the top 1 percent, while the other 99 percent share one lousy buck.A 2005 report by Citigroup concluded that the future of the American economy did not depend on the much-vaunted American consumer, but rather rested on the spending and investments of the very wealthy. The Citigroup analysts called this a plutonomy, in which economic growth is powered by the wealthy few. The global economy, with its rapid rate of change and complexity, said the analysts, would be exploited primarily by the "rich and educated."The Republicans in Congress have, in effect, endorsed this view of the future of the American economy by arguing that economic growth rests on tax cuts for the wealthy and large corporations, cutting expenditures on social programs for the poor and middle class, and reducing government regulation of businesses, including environmental and safety rules. All this fits nicely into an economic view of America as two separate groups -- the rich and the rest of us. Conservatives argue that subsidizing the rich and large multinational corporations, along with cutting government spending, will create jobs. The question, however, is what jobs and for whom? While the high-tech and financial industries clustered in places like Seattle, San Francisco, Boston and New York have quickly rebounded with high-paying jobs for the educated elite, entrepreneurs and Fortune 500 executives, jobs for the middle-class are rapidly disappearing, and there is little prospect that simply improving the lot of the rich and highly educated will help the vast majority of Americans to find a decent job.Even if one concedes the argument (which I for one do not) that most of the future growth will come from the richest 1 percent of Americans and the handful of multinational corporations, is it really in the interest of America to wander down that primrose path? Throughout recent history, virtually every society that has ignored the fundamental principle of equality has run into serious trouble. A stroll through the leafy streets of an upper-class enclave in South America or the high walls of a Middle Eastern compound for the wealthy -- all equipped with machine-toting guards and high-tech surveillance cameras -- should convince anyone that, despite the economic benefits of a plutonomy, the social price is too great for any nation to endure.America has always been -- and still remains -- dedicated to the principle of equality, even though (or perhaps because) many of its citizens had to overcome centuries of injustice and oppression. Equality of opportunity and equal treatment under the law are foundations of American society. These principles are not mere abstractions -- they have been critical to the tremendous success of the American economy over the past two hundred and thirty-five years. From small businesses to farmers, from steel workers to janitors, America represents the dream of a better life, based on equality of opportunity. While the odds are often long, and the dream is fading, there remains the hope that, with hard work and passion, success is still possible in America. However, if we as Americans accept the idea that the only hope for our future rests with the rich and the multinationals, and that we must abandon the fundamental principle of equality of opportunity, then perhaps we need to take another look at the American Dream. Even if it is not strictly in our economic interest, don't we have an obligation to the "bottom 90 percent" of American society who are so easily dismissed as irrelevant to future economic growth? Do we really want to live in a country with a slightly higher GDP, but where 90 percent of the people live in stagnation or worse? And what would be the social consequences of abandoning our commitment to equality and tossing the American Dream overboard?As President Obama pointed out in his speech to Congress recently, that is not the kind of America any of us want. It is certainly true that the American economy -- along with the global economy -- is in the midst of a deep crisis. There is great suffering as people lose their jobs, their houses and their future. And we must do everything we can to find jobs for the jobless and homes for the homeless. But we cannot forget our deep devotion to the principles that America was founded upon, and must not sacrifice our commitment to equality in the face of this crisis.*http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/09/american-poverty-vs-mexicos-solution.html*http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/09/california-poverty-rate-rises-in-2010.htmlMEXIFORNIA: THE DEATH of the AMERICAN DREAM (BOOK)*http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/book-mexifornia-shattering-of-american.html